The Talmud tells of a man who was arrested and tried by the Sanhedrin for sorcery and leading the Jewish people astray, and then the Sanhedrin executed him on the eve of the Passover. His name was Yeshu, aka Jesus, also known as ben Stada, which meant bastard son of the married woman who had an affair and was turned away by her husband.

From the Talmud Sanhedrin 67a

It is taught: R. Eliezer told the sages: Did not Ben Stada bring witchcraft with him from Egypt in a cut that was on his skin? They said to him: He was a fool and you cannot bring proof from a fool.

Ben Stada is Ben Pandira.

R. Chisda said: The husband was Stada and the lover was Pandira.

[No,] the husband was Pappos Ben Yehudah and the mother was Stada.

[No,] the mother was Miriam the women's hairdresser [and was called Stada]. As we say in Pumbedita: She has turned away [Stat Da] from her husband.

It is taught: For all others liable for the death penalty [except for the enticer to idolatry] we do not hide witnesses. How do they deal with [the enticer]? They light a lamp for him in the inner chamber and place witnesses in the outer chamber so that they can see and hear him while he cannot see or hear them. One says to him "Tell me again what you said to me in private" and he tells him. He says "How can we forsake our G-d in heaven and worship idolatry?" If he repents, good. If he says "This is our obligation and what we must do" the witnesses who hear him from outside bring him to the court and stone him. And so they did to Ben Stada in Lud and hung him on the eve of Passover.

From Talmud Sanhedrin 43a

It is taught: On the eve of Passover they hung Yeshu and the crier went forth for forty days beforehand declaring that "[Yeshu] is going to be stoned for practicing witchcraft, for enticing and leading Israel astray. Anyone who knows something to clear him should come forth and exonerate him." But no one had anything exonerating for him and they hung him on the eve of Passover.

Ulla said: Would one think that we should look for exonerating evidence for him? He was an enticer and G-d said (Deuteronomy 13:9) "Show him no pity or compassion, and do not shield him."

Yeshu was different because he was close to the government.

So ben Stada, aka Yeshu ben Pantera, aka Jesus son of Panther (the Roman soldier) was accused of sorcery and leading the Jewish people astray, and then executed by the Sanhedrin. The Talmud states that he was both stoned to death and hanged on a tree. How could it be both? That was the Jewish practice. After a man or woman was stoned to death by dropping them onto stones from a two story building followed by dropping a very heavy stone upon their bodies, their corpse was then hanged on a tree for display to others.

MISHNA V.: All who are stoned are also hanged. So is the decree of R. Eliezer. The sages, however said: Only a blasphemer and an idolater are hanged (but no others). A male is hanged with his face toward the people, and a female with her face toward a tree. So R. Eliezer. The sages, however, say: A male is hanged, but not a female. Said R. Eliezer to them: Did not Simeon b. Shetha hang females in the city of Askalon? And he was answered: He hanged eighty women in one day, and there is a rule that even two must not be sentenced in one day, if the punishment is with the same death. (Hence Simeon's act was only temporary, because of the need of that time, and nothing is to be inferred from it.)

GEMARA: The rabbis taught: It reads [Deut. xxi. 22]: "And he be put to death, and thou hang him on a tree." And lest one say: "All who are put to death must also be hanged," therefore it is written in the second verse [ibid.., ibid. 23]: "For he that is hanged is a dishonor of God" (a blasphemer), and as a blasphemer is to be stoned, the same is the case with all others who are to be stoned. So R. Eliezer. The sages, however, say: that as with a blasphemer who has denied the cardinal principle of our faith (i.e., he does not believe in God), the same is the case with an idolater who denies the might of God, but all others who are stoned are not to be hanged. And what is the point of their difference? According to the rabbis, when there is a general expression and an explicit statement, we infer from the general expression and from the explicit statement which comes after it. And R. Eliezer infers from additions and exclusions. According to the rabbis, "He should be put to death and hanged," is a general expression; "The dishonor of God--hangs," is an explicit statement. And if they were in one verse it might be said, that the general expression applies only to that which is in the explicit statement; viz., only those which are mentioned in that case, but no others. But as they are in two verses, we infer from these an idolater, who is equal to a blasphemer in all particulars. And according to R. Eliezer, "He shall be put to death and hanged," is considered an addition; "the dishonor of God" is considered an exclusion. And if they were in one verse, we would add an idolater only; but, seeing that they are in two verses, all the cases of stoning are to be added.

Could the Talmud story of ben Stada/Yeshu ben Pantera have been used to help create the gospel story of the composite biblical Jesus?

The Book of Acts has a couple references to the biblical Jesus being hanged on a tree, as happened to the victims of Sanhedrin stonings.

From Acts 5:30 The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree.

From Acts 10:39 And we are witnesses of all things which he did both in the land of the Jews, and in Jerusalem; whom they slew and hanged on a tree:

From Acts 13:29 And when they had fulfilled all that was written of him, they took him down from the tree, and laid him in a sepulchre.

This could indicate the composite, fictional, biblical Jesus was based on the Jesus in the Sanhedrin 43a story who was executed by the Sanhedrin with no Romans involved.

Why would that Talmud story be used? I suspect that some Jews did not like the original gospel story that was the Euangelion in Marcion's New Testament bible. Marcion's gospel story was about a "son of god", but his father god was not the Jewish god of the Old Testament. Marcion's Saviour was the son of a "good" god who was superior to the evil demiurge god of the Old Testament. Marcion's Isu Chrestos (Good) came to save the Jewish people from their false, demiurge, Old Testament god. (Matthew 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.)

Some Jews (Essenes? Ebionites? Therapeuts?) did not like Marcion calling the Jewish god evil and inferior, so they retaliated by turning Marcion's saviour son of the "good" Gnostic god into a Jewish son of the Jewish god by modifying the text and adding a birth story about the son of god being born to a Jewish woman, and that is where the biblical gospels came from, and why they were created, perhaps.

Yeah, given how many people were stoned and hanged, and how many people were named Jesus, it's not difficult to imagine some of those hanged were named Jesus.

It's just too bad the Talmudic sources weren't written down until the third century, so there's no way to tell which came first and thus who might be retelling whose story.

And about Peter's statements in Acts, it's not only conspicuous that he said "hanged on a tree" rather than crucified, but also notice the chronology of his statement, he says Jesus was FIRST slain, and then hanged on a tree. this corroborates with the procedure you listed of being FIRST stoned, and THEN hung. But Roman crucifixion is not well known to be done in that order. Usually it was- hung on the cross, and THEN you die, that being the cause of your death.

This could indicate the composite, fictional, biblical Jesus was based on the Jesus in the Sanhedrin 43a story who was executed by the Sanhedrin with no Romans involved.

That's another interesting discrepancy within the gospel narrative. The Sanhedrin took Jesus before Pilot because they allegedly did not have the authority to execute someone, they needed approval from a Roman authority figure with such power.

And yet, in the story of the woman caught in adultery (which BTW, if I recall correctly is a passage now believed by most scholars to have been added later), the Jews were going to stone that woman right then and there without any approval from Pilot or any other Roman authority figure. Clearly, if the story is to be believed, they either did not need permission from Pilot to execute someone, or they simply did not care and had no problem doing so illegally.

So why did they make an exception for Jesus, one whom they allegedly hated even more so than this anonymous adulteress?

Why risk the chance that Pilot would find him innocent (which he did BTW), or any other possible mishap that might come by handing him over to an unbiased figure whose customs were different than that of the Jews?

Seems like it would have been much more expedient for them to carry out the execution themselves in a swift manner just as they were going to with the adulteress.

So in that respect, the Talmudic Ben Stada's death is more believable.

Obviously the person who interpolated that passage didn't think that through.

Other evidence showing that the Sanhedrin did have the authority to execute people is found in Josephus' report of the execution of James the Just by the Sanhedrin. Sadducee, high priest Ananus and his judges, according to Josephus in Antiquities 20.9 and the account of Hegesippus in History 3.23 by Eusebius, had James stoned to death by the procedures described above that include being thrown down from a building and then being finished off by thrown stones. Eubebius and Origen wrote that Josephus had supposedly written that the fall of Jerusalem was a punishment for the killing of James the Just, but that statement has not been found in any of the works of Josephus.

Another example of the use of the death penalty was the supposed stoning to death of Steven in the Book of Acts by a group led by Sanhedrin agent Saul/Paul.

Not hard to see why Josephus wouldn't have fall of Jerusalem due to James' death. It was supposed to be due to JESUS' death. And the Christian redactors are widely suspected of interpolating Josephus already, in mentioning Jesus.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum